unchartedsectors

joined 1 month ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 18 hours ago

I didn't know about it, thanks for the link :)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 20 hours ago

That's a good point yes. It might even open publisher's doors, I've read that it was way easier to sign if you proved that you could ship something before.

The vertical slice could be an idea too, but you'd loose the possibility of building visibility over multiple steam launches I guess.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh I didn't know that, nor did I know it was them who made Defcon! Thanks for pointing that example :)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Well I actually have software engineering experience so I've built everything I could in the most modular way possible, and took care to make extensible choices as much as I could. Since nobody's putting pressure on me the code isn't a spaghetti plate (yet? :p).

Good point about the self-branding too. Though I feel like following this strategy and being a "good dev" doing it could be good on that side too.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

I've been doing software for 6+ years so I know how projects balloon and get out of scope all the time and I do my best to constrain myself with proper project management to avoid it. But yeah it's very probable that I miss the mark haha

It's not like I'd make a puzzle using the small games as pieces, nor would those small games be exactly independent, more like I'd use what I made during the previous lapse of time to build a small game.

For example now I have an almost working full economy system with buildings that buy and produce goods, pops that buy it and consume it and work in the buildings, and I'm in the process of making a nice procedural planet generator. After that I'll work on autonomous traders that go from one market to the other to profit of the arbitrage between goods. In the end I also need a way to set up specific player-defined trade routes. Well, if I do those two and modify them a bit, they make for a good basis off which making a trading game. Said game can enjoy the work I've made for the "big game" and I'll obviously have to make specific features for it to be worth playing by itself, but half the game will simply be the core features of the "big game", so I get to polish and improve them while working on the mini trading game.

It's true that I have to be careful with modules management though.

Yep, I feel like you're right in your last points. Thank you for your input :)

 

Hey everyone!

Excuse me for the slightly clickbaity title (is it, though?). I need all the advice I can get here.

About six months ago, I ignored all the common advice and started working on the Dream Game™ as my first commercial release. I expect it to be ready in about four years.

Since I had no real marketing experience, I've been learning by listening to GDC talks and Chris Z's videos whenever I have "dumb chores" time or similar. More and more, I see proof of the great advantages of making small games: building on past releases, proving your ability to ship, and confronting yourself with the market as early as possible.

Obviously, that clashes pretty hard with a four-year first project. So I thought, and thought, and thought — and a few days ago, something clicked.

What if I were to release features of my game as standalone "mini"-games?

I'm working on a 4X grand strategy game, which is basically at least four games smashed into one. So if I'm working on the trading system, why not take a short detour and make a trading game in, say, 3 to 9 months, and release it for 10 bucks? Then do the same later for colony building, exploration, war...

I could even make a franchise out of it. The full game is called Uncharted Sectors, so the smaller ones could be titled Uncharted Sectors: [Trading Game Name], Uncharted Sectors: [Colony Management Game Name], and so on. It would build up the IP and help with brand recognition.

On the plus side:

  • I prove to the world (and myself) that I'm actually releasing games, not vaporware,

  • I continue working on the systems of my dream game most of the time: code can be reused and improved based on player feedback,

  • Bugfixing the mini-games will probably help squash bugs in the main game, at least for the core shared code,

  • I gain actual release experience, which will benefit the dream game,

  • Players who bought the mini-games are likely future buyers of the full game thanks to the shared IP/brand,

  • Hopefully, it generates a bit of revenue to help fund the dream game,

  • And if I'm making terrible products, it's better to find out after 9 months than after dedicating 4 years of my life to it.

On the minus side:

  • Total dev time will increase,

  • I might get sidetracked,

  • My current following might hate the idea,

  • If one of the mini-games is bad, it could damage my reputation and deter people from checking out the full game.

As you can see, the downside seems pretty small compared to the upside. So either it’s a very good idea... or I’m missing something big. That's why I'm here: please poke holes in this plan and find more reasons why it might be a bad idea!

Also, on a more general note: do you know of any games that have done something like this? What do you think of the idea? I'd love to hear anything relevant to the topic.

And of course the idea is free: feel free to copy it if you think it’s interesting. :)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Hey there, honestly I'm not a Lemmy power user, I just posted in the .world because it was the one with the most people subscribed. I have no particular attachment to any specific instance.

I don't get much what reviving entails, just posting somewhere?

 

Hey there!

I'm working on a sci-fi grand strategy game with a deep focus on economy and market mechanics.

I'd be curious about what you'd want to see in a strategy game like that. What economic mechanics have you enjoyed elsewhere? What annoyed you? What would spark your interest?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

MEIOU & Taxes may help you wait if you never tried it. It seems that EU5 takes a lot of ideas from it, so it's kinda EU4.5 haha

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

He never fails to make me laugh :)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Thank you for the link, I didn't know the inner workings of it :)

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm using Ubuntu myself to develop actually so I'm kind of doing that all the time. The problem is, my machine isn't everyone's machine, my drivers aren't anyone's drivers, and so on.

In the end I think that I'll try to give Linux builds to testers to see if they report a lot of bugs or not and decide at that moment if it's too much work or not.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Haha problem is I have a kid to feed, and I fear that cutting myself from 90% of my potential player might be a bad play if I want to be able to continue feeding him

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes my bad haha I had trouble to find another way to write that title which wasn't too long but would mention Steam

 

Hey there!

I'm a solo dev working on a sci-fi grand strategy game (I didn't manage to find if self-promo is allowed so I'll keep the name for myself).

I was updating my planning and started to think: since my game will be published on Steam, it will be playable on Linux using Compatibility Mode even if I don't specifically target Linux itself. I myself play on an Ubuntu and this allows me to play almost every Windows game (old ones are more capricious, but recent ones are ok).

So I'm wondering, is there really an advantage to have native Linux support nowadays? As a solo dev, the thing I lack the most is time. The days/weeks/months it would take me to add it and fix all the probable bugs it entails could be used to improve the game itself or add features instead for example.

On a more general note, what do you other Linux players expect from a Linux game?

view more: next ›